tv Outnumbered FOX News November 8, 2019 9:00am-10:00am PST
you were sleeping? >> bill: i keep my phone in my kitchen. >> sandra: that's in the river. >> bill: that's exec right! my ipad is a different story. good luck as we can. the >> sandra: go tigers, purple and gold. that's it for us. we will see you back on monday. "outnumbered" starts now. >> harris: fox news alert with this radical and president trump setting up his criticism of democrats and piquant inquiry ahead of public hearings which are set to begin next week. today, acting white house chief of staff mick mulvaney divide house could make out subpoenas to testify. didn't show up. the president told reporters a short time ago that he would be fine with mulvaney testifying. however, he called democrats' investigation "illegitimate." watch. >> i don't want to give them credibility to a corrupt witch hunt. i would love to have him go up, frankly. i think he would do great. i would love to have him go up. i would love to have almost every person go up, when they know me. what i don't like is when they put all these people i've never met before.
when they put the head of the never-trumpers on the stand. >> harris: that, as republicans on the house intelligence committee are working on a list of witnesses they would like to call to testify in those public hearings beginning next week after committee chairman adam schiff issued a deadline of tomorrow, saturday, for the minority to submit their requests. schiff says republicans only to justify their witnesses' relevance to the inquiry. in real money we could get a batch of additional transcripts from closed-door depositions released sometime today. we are watching for all of it. you are watching "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. here today, melissa francis. fox news contributor, katie pavlich. also a fox news contributor, marie harf. in the center seat, alex koenig. former communications director for senator marco rubio, he is "outnumbered." always great to see you. >> alex: good to be back, thanks for having me! >> harris: things are
progressing, and we potentially will see this whole thing go public, but there's more to come in terms of transcripts. a long back and forth with the president today. what are the headlines, to you, out of what we saw? >> alex: is remarkable to me how fast this is moving. since then, a lot has happened in terms of the information that we know. our understanding of what the president did or didn't do. all that's happening around him inside the registration, vis-a-vis ukraine. it's really interesting that we are now at this point were next week it'll be public and televised in the american people are going to really focus on it for the first time. the president, what he indicated today is his strategy is to label this a partisan inquiry. that's what the republicans will spend all next week doing. saying that this is part again , trying to remove the present for office. >> harris: as you were speaking, as always, there is breaking news. [laughter] >> melissa: it is friday.
>> harris: the nsa director of european affairs, lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, and that behind closed-doors that we saw blurbs from. fiona hill and tim morrison, we are expecting those transcripts. we are hearing from our senior producer on the hill, chad pergram, but this could be a minute. what are democrats are saying is the worst part so far to come out for president trump, marie? >> marie: part of what democrats have focused on is the pattern. it's not just the whistleblower count. it's not just colonel vindman. it's not just any one person. as multiple officials at multiple levels and multiple agencies, basically saying the same thing. but this was bigger than a phone call. that president trump repeatedly asked his personal attorney to get involved in government business, to get dirt on a political opponent. we can debate by each of the individual witnesses. we will do that as these public
hearings happen. but what democrats are focused on is the pattern and the volume of information. we might get another call transcript. so there's not a question of fact, it's what they mean them but they shouldn't for the president. >> harris: katie, before i come to you, let's hear the president on that second phone call, which technically is the first because it happened in april. the second one was in july. watch. >> well, they don't want to give all this information on a scan. it's a witch hunt. i'm okay with releasing it. it doesn't bother me. i know what i said, it was fine. but they do want to have the second call, which is really the first call. the one before this. i had a call, i'm sure it was fine. i make a lot of calls. but i had no problem releasing it. >> harris: katie? >> katie: well, the president has always been transparent. there was a lot of back-and-forth when the second call, as he pointed out, was released publicly. there were questions about
whether that would set a bad precedent not just for president trump but presidents in the future about what they should and should not be releasing in terms of having private conversations with foreign leaders, and with the consequences that would be. in terms of the facts, we do have a number of witnesses making this claim. we also have witnesses changing their testimony and we also have them analyzing what they thought happened on the call, which is no different than any of us reading the transcript of the phone call. there's a lot of going back and forth about saying, "i presumed this was about a quid pro quo." but they don't actually know that it was because there's no hard evidence that that happened. i think americans will see this play out next week firsthand. it'll be interesting to see adam schiff calling on a minority to submit their witness lists for next week. there's a lot of rules that come with his reaching out to say, "give us a list of the people you want to testify." whether he approves them and who they will be will also be interesting to watch. >> harris: we are seeing the
second bite at the apple, potentially, some of the witnesses behind closed doors. like ambassador yovanovitch. i can't imagine democrats would say no to some of the people who have already testified behind closed doors, but we'd have to see what happens. >> melissa: that will be interesting to see. i agree with marie in the sense that the facts are out there. we know, we see in the transcript, we know kind of what happened. i think what we need to know, the essential essential questios down to whether what he did was improper. to answer that question, was it about digging to her about a political opponent, or was it about pursuing corruption? you have to know what hunter biden was doing. those things are inextricably linked. what did he do an exchange of that money? if you did something that was corrupt, the president was pursuing corruption. if he didn't do something that was corrupt, maybe he was doing something to dig up something on a political opponent. but i would say that senator john kennedy said that
in the last hour, and that is the road republicans will go down. i don't know if democrats are prepared for that. what exactly hunter biden was paid three or four or five times what you normally pay someone to be on the board. he had a board where he had no knowledge of no reason to be there. if you're going to be on any board in the world, why would you join one in ukraine? it's not detroit. you could find somewhere else. it goes back to that. >> alex: i think it's safe to predict that house republicans will want hunter biden to testify. and adam schiff is going to say no. that's the first fight we see you next week. the republican saying it's outrageous, that the democrats want them call up hunter biden. >> harris: let me give this in real quickly. same topic. we are awaiting those new transcripts. fox news has obtained exclusive emails between former ukraine ambassador marie yovanovitch and a democratic committee staffer that appeared to contradict her closed-door testimony last month. just two days after the whistleblower complaint was filed, we now know a democratic
staffer reached out to yovanovitch via her personal email account concerning a "delicate and time-sensitive matter." in testimony, yovanovitch indicated she did not respond to that email and asked the state department to handle it. we now know yovanovitch did respond to that email and said she "looked forward" to the conversation. democratic house foreign affairs committee spokesperson is characterizing that outreach as innocuous. saying congress has a constitutional duty to conduct oversight, and the committee wanted to hear from an ambassador whose assignment was cut short under unusual circumstances. yovanovitch has become a key witness of the impeachment inquiry. she is set to testify publicly next friday. marie? >> marie: and she will be asked about that. >> harris: well, i hope so. lefty mike >> marie: it's why we have public hearings, and we've all called for those. this issue will be on the table. there is thousands of pages of
testimony to go through that will be part of this public hearing. >> harris: forgive the interruption, but this is a little different then going back and asking a bunch of questions. specifically, did she lie? and how significant is that why versus the truth? katie? >> katie: that will be the question. it is significant in the sense of, when people are watching this play out at home, the question is, do they really carg back and forth between the u.s. ambassador to ukraine and a democratic staffer? and whether or not the credibility of witnesses will hold up to what adam schiff needs t to go forward with real vote on articles of impeachment. when you have people lying about their contact with the democrats who are running this thing, that becomes an issue people and it's beneficial for trump. are the people who are cooperating with the investigation, do they have a political ax to grind? to melissa's point, i just want to bring this up -- yesterday there was news from the senate.
republicans in the house don't have much power when it comes to calling witnesses, they don't have subpoena power. but senator grassley sent a letter to the state department yesterday asking for all the emails about hunter biden and burisma, and what that looked like. whether he was asking for special access i as a result of being vice president biden's son pair this opens up a whole new issue of investigations. whether they want to go down this road with joe biden as their person who they think is going to be the president, people can look at that for themselves and see if they believe in that kind of corruption or influence-peddling. >> marie: i want to pick up on that, as well. the two points a finger important, president trump was asked if he pursued corruption in any other country about anyone else or if it was just this. he can't answer that. i think that's interesting. the second point is that there are legal ways to do it, and it
doesn't involve your personal attorney doing state permit business. rudy giuliani taking state department business to do this is not how you should pursue -- >> melissa: i agree with that. >> harris: you saw this little while go on the white house lawn, he saw him talk about that with one of the journalists. "why didn't you use the doj?" i agree with you, i think that's a fair question. >> alex: obviously the fact that rudy giuliani is in the middle of this is why it's a problem for trump to begin with. if you went through official channels in the state department he wouldn't be in the mess he's in right now. in fact, rudy giuliani is still in the middle of this. he hasn't distanced himself at all. >> harris: look, it's hundreds of pages of testimony. yovanovitch's, and mckinley's. rudy giuliani was all up in there. as we say. however, rudy giuliani was all over television for weeks. [laughs] he gave us information already. >> marie: he should testify publicly. >> harris: i felt like he did!
[laughter] >> alex: we know it rudy giuliani did. we also know the state department and other people in the administration were really concerned about what rudy giuliani was doing. i think that is at the core of this and at some point the president might want to throw rudy giuliani under the bus. >> melissa: i would bet he's already considered that. i think that's coming. >> marie: rudy is not going to take out lying down, by the way. he probably has texts and emails and documents about the role he played in this, as do a lot of these witnesses. >> alex: the one thing i know about trump as he has no problem firing people even if they seem to have dirt on him. there are a lot of people. >> katie: when he says it's tied to the origins of the russia investigation on the corruption at all that, he did send bill barr to italy to meet with officials, australian officials. he did use official channels on other topics to pursue the same kind of issue that he is claiming is connected to this ukraine call. >> marie: but not on joe biden, which is the question. >> harris: all right, we'll
move on. speaking of which, joe and hunter biden are back in the spotlight as senate republicans have turned up the pressure on the former vice president and his son, as we've been talking about. we'll get into it more. plus, former new york city mayor michael bloomberg might be jumping into the 2020 race. elizabeth warren says she has some thoughts about that. as does president trump. >> he's not going to do well, but i think he will hurt biden, actually. but he doesn't have the magic to do well. there's nobody i would rather run against then little michael. ♪ we made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for.
usaa a more secure diaper closure. there were babies involved... and they weren't saying much. that's what we do at 3m, we listen to people, even those who don't have a voice. we are people helping people. to work as hard as they do. however, since 2000, the buying power of the dollar has dropped by over 31% - that means the dollar is only worth about 68¢ now compared to 2000. had you owned gold, your value would have increased over 400% and owning gold is easy... with rosland capital - a trusted leader in helping people acquire precious metals. gold bullion, lady liberty gold and silver proofs, and our premium coins, can help you preserve your wealth. call rosland capital at 800-630-8900 to receive your free rosland guide to gold, gold & precious metals ira and silver brochures.
now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today. ♪ >> melissa: former new york city mayor michael bloomberg appears to be seriously considering entering the race for president. the billionaire is expected to
file paperwork today to get on the ballot for alabama's democratic primary. his political advisor sitting in a statement, "in 2018 he spent more than $100 million to help elect democrats to ensure that congress began to hold the president accountable. we now need to finish the job and ensure that trump is defeated," but mike is increasingly concerned that the field of candidate is not well-positioned to do that." senator elizabeth warren treating, "welcome to the race, michael bloomberg. if you're looking for policy plans that will make a huge difference for working people and which are very popular, start here." she included a link to her new billionaires calculator to help bloomberg and figure out how much tax he would pay under her wealth plan. okay, that's pretty funny. [laughter] i wonder, marie -- democrats say if you look at any poll,
everyone is beating trump. biden is beating time, they are all winning. but i think if you took your woman's reality lasso and said, "what's the truth commit" democrats are worried that there's not a candidate out there that is going to beat president trump. that's what michael bloomberg is saying. "oh, boy, i'm going to get in." that's what it says. >> marie: absolutely. a lot of democrats are t too far left to be donald trump. in virginia and other places, philadelphia, other places around the country, the places we want voters back we did it with moderate democrats. joe biden is the moderate democratic leader of the party right now, but he, to a lot of people come seems to be past his prime. >> harris: that was so gentle. [laughter] >> marie: and very diplomatic about joe biden because i deeply respect him. but michael bloomberg is not the answer to that problem. i think maybe we can all agree on that.
>> melissa: the problem -- and we kind of talked about in intro, alex -- but him getting in, he makes joe biden even weaker. he's going to draw votes from anyone in the primary, he's going to go and hurt joe biden even worse. >> alex: i think that's right. there is moderate, joe biden. he is under performing. there was a mayor of new york in the race, and he did so badly he dropped out. there is a billionaire in the race right now, tom steyer, you can't find a single supporter in iowa. so i don't know what michael bloomberg is looking at, in the current field, and saying "clearly there's a lien for me here." i don't think he's going to get much support. i think he could spend a ton of money, and from a republican perspective, i welcome this. he could really prolong this race. if he is going to file in alabama today, perceptively he will spend money in alabama, which means the nominee is going to have to go campaign in alabama. >> harris: i want to throw this poll out for our viewers. this is the most recent fox news poll from october 27 through
30th. if this person got into the democratic race, you would. michelle obama, 50% the visit for. a percent, never vote for them. that hillary clinton, 30% never. michael bloomberg, yikes! only 6% say they would definitely vote for him. 32%. he has the biggest negative. what you think, harris? >> harris: i look at that and i wonder how much of that is because he has stuck his tote in and out. you know what i mean? i know this sounds a little bit ridiculous. i do live in new york but right next to her in jersey. as you find a cross-country, michelle obama's name -- she was the first lady. hillary clinton, you know. she has run for president twice. >> melissa: but that doesn't get you to 32% "i definitely wouldn't vote for him." be when i'm just talking about
the 6% might be part of not knowing him. the 32%, sometimes it counts as a negative. when people think, "why are you getting in the race to take away some of the pie from people we actually know?" >> katie: all these candidates have been in the race for a while now. to jump in after a lot of the work by other democrats and campaigns has been done, people having to qualify for debates, spending money, states getting ready for the iowa caucuses, which is right around the corner, that something people are probably irritated about. this does hurt joe biden, for sure. it sets up, again, another to be between democrats that republicans can use in the general election and makes it difficult to beat the incumbent. >> harris: i see that weld calculator, and like "big" with tom hanks. is it really big? the big wealth calculated. he's somebody who could explain how elizabeth warren is going to pay for her medicare for all probably better than she could.
>> katie: the president is an executive. he has executive experience running the biggest city in the country, and therefore he's more qualified than a lot of these other senators like elizabeth warren who simply roll out plans instead of actually governing. >> melissa: we've got to go. red flags were raised about hundred biden in the previous white house the bombshell testimony that could prove a problem for democrats, and the former vice president now turn presence of candidates. plus, the record top republicans are speaking about the younger biden. just what does the obama state department now about his dealings with ukraine? ♪ because allergies... shouldn't get in the way of a good time. because a heart attack... should never stop the heart of a family. because hemophilia... shouldn't keep someone from doing what's in their blood. at bayer, everything we do... from advances in health to innovations in agriculture...
is to help every life we touch. at bayer, this is why we science. so did you gkind of. car? thanks to navy federal it only took 5 minutes. so vets can join? oh yeah. how do you kind of buy a new car? it's used. it's for mikey. you know he's gonna have girls in that car. yeah. he's gonna have two of them. great benefits for veterans from navy federal credit union... our members are the mission.
make family-sized meals fast, and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. see how to keep people moving, ♪ to keep a city moving. with esri location technology, you can see what others can't. ♪ ♪ >> harris: republicans are turning up the heat on hunter biden. senate committee chairs ron johnson and chuck grassley have asked secretary of state mike pompeo to release any state department records related to joe biden's son, and the
ukrainian energy company on whose board he served. the senators have written a letter saying they want to better understand what actions were taken to ensure policy decisions relating to ukraine and burisma, the energy company, were not improperly influenced by the employment and financial interests of family members. the senators also want any records on john kerry's stepson, christopher heintz, who was once a business partner of the younger biden. katie? >> katie: christopher heintz reportedly broke off business ties with joe biden as a result of him joining the burisma board, concerns he had over the dealings there. there are now emails from lobbying firms showing that they want to leverage hunter biden's position on the burisma board as a way to get to the state department to get special favors. and that's what this is all about. they want to know about what was
going on. was there any improper access given as a result of him being on the board, being paid by a foreign company, and using his last name to get special meetings? as these emails show. et cetera, et cetera. senator grassley is good at this stuff. he has spent an entire lifetime during oversight and they certainly will be asking the state department for those documents in addition to the ones i get. i'm sure they will be happy to comply. >> harris: is this, marie, where it gets complicated that hunter biden give that interview from which we all could get a transcript? since that seems to be the vernacular were these days. where he talked about, "yeah, using my name, i shouldn't of done this." but he did. now his father is being looked out for what he knew and when he knew it, so on and so forth. >> marie: there are two key points. first, sure, ask for the information. i don't think there's any information to indicate people got meetings they shouldn't have gotten because joe biden's son was on some board.
i certainly see no evidence of that no one has produced any yet. the thing that bothers me a little bit is the state to permit has been stonewalling democratic congressional requests for documents on the whole host of issues. then i rush to give chuck grassley these documents. i don't think that's a good look for the state department. they should fill document requests from democrats and republicans, and they've been stonewalling when democrats ask not of this issue but others. >> harris: i do understand and respect what you say. pretty good to look at the evidence and see where the arrows point. what we are really talking about is swampiness. i think the bar and out how swamptastic is is different on how you are going to figure do you march off as a candidate for president. former russian advisor fee on a hill, we set her transcripts are coming out momentarily. they have popped. our senior producer on capitol hill, chad pergram, says the fiona hill testimony has
been posted. we know we've seen this online. you print many of them will know if of 200 or 300 pages. we aren't able to see this one yet, but chad can. he always sends us the link, melissa. as soon as we can cook on it, we will. meanwhile, chad is going through this. he typically gives us the top headlines out of those first 90 to 100 pages. he's amazing at looking at these materials. we will go live to him as soon as we can. alex, your thought on the hunter biden? we are still taking a look at video back on topic here. >> alex: on hunter biden, to me it's a reminder of how poorly the biden campaign has handled the situation. there is the one interview he did the day of the debate where he had acknowledged it showed poor judgment, but didn't then that she didn't apologize for it, didn't say he was going to do it again. and biden has never really interested of the event a kind of point the republicans.
>> harris: for the biden family, i would imagine -- >> alex: the biden campaign needs to get out of this. clearly the republicans aren't going to let it go. they should be much more transparent -- >> harris: i've heard that said before about other topics. the biden campaign needs to get out of this. >> alex: they should be more transparent about what hunter was doing. >> marie: they are not responding quickly to things. on this issue, where i don't believe vice president biden did anything wrong, they have been slow to respond. i think because they don't want to get down into the mud with president trump. but where they are. we are all in the mud to get. >> harris: you know what else we are? where it with chad pergram on capitol hill, who has a transcript. i was just boasting about how great you are at speed reading all of this. give us a couple of headlines, and how long is this one? >> four to 46 pages. it's bigger. >> harris: is that as heavily-redacted is the last one we saw?
>> there are some reductions at the top. i get about 20 pages in and there's a couple individual lines that have been redacted. we haven't seen much of that before. this is the first thing that jumps out at me. the first ten or 11 pages, it deals with matt gaetz, republican congressman from florida, trying to sit in and ask questions during the session with fiona hill. there is a point here where he says to adam schiff, "i'm a member of the judiciary committee. i deserved to be here. i can ask questions." and schiff says, "take a signal to press." and matt gaetz is to adam schiff, "you're going to have someone come in here and remove me?" and he says, "no, you're going to remove yourself." so the first ten or 11 minutes is this political food fight going on in the committee about who is able to be there and ask questions. keep in mind that members of the oversight and the traditiona jul committees can sit in but not asked questions for those under
the purview of members of the intelligence committee, and those are the committees having open hearings next week. the other thing i should tell you about fiona hill, she spent ten hours in that deposition on the 14th of october. it was pretty long. a lot of people said she was brought into the administration because of her expertise on russia. i think there is now a dearth of policy experts in the administration because of the expertise that she brought on that particular issue here. one of the concerns that she expressed was this "irregular channel" that we keep hearing about in diplomatic circles, about rudy giuliani and ambassador to the european union, ordinance online, to do with ukraine. she quit back in august, so she is no longer a member. again, i'm up to about page 20 or 25 of this 446-page transcript. so i will go back and dig deeper here. the other transcript that we are expecting today is about lieutenant colonel alexander vindman. he was in charge of european policy.
at the national security council. this is something we do know that he said in the deposition a couple weeks ago. he said, "if ukraine pursued an investigation into the bidens and burisma it would be interpreted as a partisan plan. he would undoubtedly resolve in ukraine losing the bipartisan support. it has thus far maintained." vindman's on the telephone call, and he thought of his testimony that some of the partial transcript, the notes release from the telephone call with the president and the leader of ukraine, left out important words and phrases and that was necessary for context. when we look at the transcript from george kent, the state government official, he indicated that body language and tone of voice and hesitancy in the conversation he had with vindman, that there was concern about that telephone call. that's something george kent testified when we looked through his remarks yesterday. >> harris: excuse me one second, but just on that one
quick point you're making with george kent, some of the criticism about the transcripts or the testimony in general, chad, has been that it's been another person's view of another person's view of another thing. is that continuing? >> that was certainly present there in the transcript with george kent. we kept hearing these things even a couple days ago with gordon sondland, the word "presumed" kept coming up. that was key, as well. this is what republicans hone in on. you have direct custody of information on the phone call? when we get to the vindman transcript here, hopefully in the next few minutes, he was somebody on the phone call. that something those folks can speak more directly to, the content of the phone call. this is even where you had bill taylor, the investor, the acting ambassador to ukraine and gordon sondland interpreting the president's beliefs. this is why maybe additional witnesses in these hearings might be important.
i try to offer up their witnesses. again, adam schiff, chairman of the committee, he has veto power. >> harris: dad, i hate to put on the spot , but you know everything all time. the president have another phone call people are circling around. i said for a while that if there's one phone call there's a bunch of phone calls. what are you hearing about this other call? >> that is something we don't know as much about. it's been a little hard to get information because the house of representatives has been out of session this week. we had heard chatter about that. that's where people have said, "wait a minute, if we have only a partial transcript of this phone call, maybe there's an issue with an additional phone call." and you can bet dollars to doughnuts that that will come up in some form at the two hearings next week. wednesday and then a week from today, friday, with marie yovanovitch, from ambassador to ukraine. >> harris: breaking news, my phone exploded, to try and dig this up. vindman has just posted.
eve usually been so's to be quick about this, you'll beat us to the punch. let's let you step away and skip some information. is that cool for you, chad? and we'll come back. sounds great. thank you, my friend. let's chew on what we know so far here, alex. your thoughts? >> alex: this is all getting very confusing very quickly. there's a lot of characters here. in part because we haven't seen him testify, we don't know the sound of their voices. all we get are these very long transcripts. i don't know that making it complicated helps the democrats case. >> harris: why not? >> alex: at the end of the day they need to convince the american people, if they want to impeach tom, that whatever trump did is worth removing him from office. that's a pretty simple message. if inside you're trying to explain a big conspiracy theory, even if it actually is a conspiracy, it makes it a lot harder. just from a communications perspective.
you want to keep it simple, and this is getting really complicated. >> harris: is that part of the reason, alex, that we started hearing words like "bribery" in the last few days? >> alex: it's possible. >> harris: is that more on the vernacular than "quid pro quo?" >> alex: i think it's possible. at the end of the day, they haven't -- >> harris: there on the break. not all of them come with the house -- >> alex: were in the middle of a process but they've dumped a lot of evidence of the american people and the media, that people are still kind of chewing through. but they haven't laid out their case for why trump should be removed. perceptively that's coming. >> marie: that's what articles of impeachment are decided to do. speak to them and vote on that yet. >> marie: of course not, they're getting information and they will drop the articles. they might include bribery. >> harris: marie, i understand the counter, but you know we don't have lot of working days left, bicamerally, on the hill.
if this were so urgent coming out of the break out the end of the summer, i've got another one. i'm not saying they can't do both. you see adam schiff during the break, you see him up there during these conferences. but it's very different than everybody being presidents. >> marie: the intelligence committee has continued working for the break. they've done depositions, work on weekends, and they've done pretty diligently to get information as much as possible. this is moving fairly quickly for congress. but i don't think the american people, the person they are trying to message here, i think it senate republicans. american public opinion is -- impeachment is not supposed to be based polling. typically when it comes out to -- >> harris: him i might be voting when it gets put past january. >> marie: it'll be a party line vote. >> harris: i mean people voting. >> marie: i understand that, but when we get to the senate, they say there's a bucket of republicans either up for election in tough states or think of themselves as senior
statement like lamar alexander, that might be gettable. that's who they are. >> katie: this is not the topic that they are going to campaign against senate republicans on. on the list of things they want to be campaigning on, they are not getting phone calls about impeachment in their offices, and their town halls back home. not a whole lot. they're getting phone calls in places like iowa about usmca and why they're not doing anything about it. they are getting calls about border security. impeachment, just like the russia topic, it's not something people i really that concerned about. when you look at the context of the scandal, the conspiracy they are trying to build, if i'm out in the middle of america and i'm watching, i go, "this is an isolated d.c. bubble-type problem medieval mats overseas having conversations of people. under biden, what he was doing there. sitting on a board and getting paid $50,000 a month." i don't think that is something you can convince people of when it seems like such an isolated
d.c., swampy issue. >> melissa: the polling also says everybody is going to be to president trump. if people believe that polling, michael bloomberg would be getting in. that was my point earlier. i don't think anybody believes that on anything any longer. i think you're right about the idea that it's gotten too complicated. and nancy pelosi kind of picked the wrong issue. maybe she was forced to pick the wrong issue. but they felt this was something. read that in the beginning come over and over again. this is something ready people can understand. president trump got on the phone call, he said "do this for me and i will give you money. if i was going to be an easy sale. i think both parties have been good in the past is kind of muddying the water. the deeper you get into it, the more everyone's eyes glaze over on all fronts. it's kind of like they lost the message, and it's gotten out of control. when you ask regular people who are not sitting around here discussing it like us, he was
getting impeached, isn't he?" you either believe he deserves it or he doesn't, based on that. as for this particular issue, most people are like, "ugh." >> katie: talking about aid, people have "actually, it's a good thing that people are concerned about my money going overseas to another country." >> harris: it when you ask whether he's being impeached, a lot of people have their own view that the president maybe right. the house majority is democrats. i have had viewers tell me, "is he being impeached because the democrats don't like him and they are in charge of the house, and he will be impeach there but not the senate?" people are following in their own way, all of this. we are quickly, we are now able to double-team this. you got chad pergram, our senior producer on the hill, and senior correspondent mike emanuel working on the transcripts that
just dropped from lieutenant colonel alexander been men of european affairs, director there. and the russian advisor, formerly fee on a hill. our team of journalists on the hill when we come back. ♪ ey saving news for my fellow veterans. va mortgage rates have dropped to near 50 year lows. call newday usa. one call can save you $2000 a year. with the newday va streamline refi there's no income verification, no appraisal and no out of pocket costs. and my team can close your loan in as little as 30 days. one call can save you $2000 every year.
doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. i want to tell as many veterans near ras possible about newday's va streamline refi. it's the closest thing to automatic savings that we've ever offered. at newday, veterans can refinance their mortgage with no income verification, no appraisal
and no out of pocket expenses. and we've extended our call center hours so that every veteran can take advantage of these near record low rates. >> melissa: be told you that those transcripts had been put out online. mike emanuel is live on capitol hill right now, and he has been coming through them as we've been talking about just the beginning. mike, what have you found so far? >> melissa, more than 400 pages, still lots to read. a lot of things i picked up in the 40s or so of the transcript, for those reading along at home, basically your hearing concern from fiona hill and the severe career diplomats about the approval of marie yovanovitch, who was brought home from her post as the ambassador to ukraine, and she is blaming rudy giuliani for that. he was the president's private attorney.
in questioning fiona hill is asked basically if this was a campaign that giuliani had set in motion. why did the removal of the ambassador yovanovitch mark a turning point for you? "because there is no basis for removal. the accusations against her have no merit whatsoever." "who did you understand was responsible for removal?" "i understood this to be the result of the campaign that mr. giuliani had set in motion in conjunction with people who are writing articles, publications that i would have expected better of." so, click concerned about that. also, fiona hill weighs in on john bolton's concerns about this campaign being led by rudy giuliani. this parallel campaign in foreign policy. she is asked about rudy giuliani being a hand grenade that is going to blow everybody up. she is asked, "did you discuss ambassador yovanovitch with ambassador bolton?" she says, "i did." "and what was his reaction to
this?" "his reaction was pained. he directly said rudy giuliani is a hand grenade that is going to blow everybody up. he made it clear that he didn't feel there was anything he could personally do about this." to be fair to mr. bolton, he was asked to testify yesterday, he did not go with the subpoena. perhaps we will get assessed when at some point. but this is about rudy giuliani, the removal of ambassador marie yovanovitch, and john bolton, former national security advisor. >> melissa: thank you for that. i want to bring it up to the couch. marie, i don't know the answer to this question. if rudy giuliani was over they are trying to carry out his own foreign policy or whatever, is that illegal? >> marie: that's a good question, is that illegal? certainly an abuse of some kind of power, particularly if someone in the government told them to do it. and sort of used government resources to pursue government ends, but as a private citizen. i don't know if it's illegal.
that's a good question. >> melissa: i don't know, i've read a lot where people --dash that you could have somebody else around there, trying to get information. that sort of thing. to my mind, the question becomes whether rudy giuliani was pursuing his own personal interests. what does that mean? >> marie: he was working with other investors. the ambassador to the e.u., gordon sondland. and kurt volker and rick perry. we had multiple people testifying -- >> harris: part was nuanced. she's not saying -- forgive me, i'm just going to put it down the way i heard it. >> melissa: go for it. >> harris: what i hear you saying, which is nuanced, is that you're not asking if rudy giuliani was doing something illegal on behalf of the president of the country. you're asking if illegality came into play if he was doing something for himself. >> melissa: it seems like they could deafly jump off into
illegal territory. i'm trying to figure out, if you have somebody else pursuing policy -- the president could make the argument that he just got through his whole oaks doesn't trust career bureaucrats. he wants his own people trying to get information to bring back. it might not be what a lot of other people would do. is it actually illegal? and separately, i am wondering myself, what was rudy giuliani doing over there? >> katie: i don't think it's illegal in the sense that it's happened before. blumenthal worked for hillary clinton and a lot of these ways to do shadow diplomacy in some aspects when she was in office. john kerry has been doing this by meeting with the irradiance. rudy giuliani has been doing this, you said, maybe on behalf of the president who said he wanted them to find out if there was any corruption going on and bring him back information. so it's not illegal.
is that bad for the diplomatic process? does it get people like rudy giuliani in a lot of trouble? absolutely. the illegality part of it would be if he's advocating on behalf of a foreign government without registering. that would be the issue. as far as we can tell, he was doing it on behalf of the united states. >> melissa: you're saying, was he getting paid advocate? it wouldn't just be, "here's my opinion, this is the person -- >> katie: it depends on what kind of information are putting forth. if it becomes espionage, that's a problem. one thing it's important to point out, diplomats and ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the president. the idea that yovanovitch was removed for reasons that they don't believe in their own opinion were valid, you can be removed as an ambassador by the president for any reason. he doesn't even have to have a reason. i think it's important to point that out. that it wasn't justified, there wasn't a reason to do so.
it doesn't matter is president. if they don't want that person that position, they are allowed to remove them just because of their power and the position. political position. >> alex: i think that's right, but at the 30,000-foot level, the issue here is that the trump of instruction appears to hold up aid those authorized by congress because they were trying to get dirt on one of the president's rivals. it doesn't really matter who did that. that doesn't look good. if that what bears out in all these public hearings in the coming weeks, that's what a lot of republican senators and republicans in general are going to be comfortable with. >> harris: we are starting to get through vindman's testimony. he's being asked whether or not he was aware of any ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. he says, "i am unaware of any factual basis for the accusations against ambassador yovanovitch, and i'm frankly unaware of any authoritative basis for ukrainian interference in 2016 elections based on my knowledge." then he is asked about whether
or not you recall specifically what sondland said to the ukrainians. "right, the conversation unfolded with sondland proceeding to kind of, you know, review what the deliverable would be. there was no ambiguity, i guess, in my mind. he was calling for an investigation that didn't exist into the bidens and burisma." he does say that sondland talked about the investigation into the bidens, and frankly -- this is this is vindman talking -- "i can't 100% recall because i didn't take notes of it." that's it. >> melissa: more "outnumbered" in just a moment. we'll be right back. this piece is talking to me.
yeah? so what do you see? i see an unbelievable opportunity. i see best-in-class platforms and education. i see award-winning service, and a trade desk full of experts, available to answer your toughest questions. and i see it with zero commissions on online trades. i like what you're seeing. it's beautiful, isn't it? yeah. td ameritrade now offers zero commissions on online trades. ♪ hi, my name is sam davis and i'm going to tell you about exciting plans available to anyone with medicare. many plans provide broad coverage and still may save you money on monthly premiums and prescription drugs. with original medicare, you're covered for hospital stays and doctor office visits, but you
have to meet a deductible for each and then you're still responsible for 20% of the cost. next, let's look at a medicare supplement plan. as you can see, they cover the same things as original medicare and they also cover your medicare deductibles and co-insurance. but they often have higher monthly premiums and no prescription drug coverage. now, let's take a look at humana's medicare advantage plans. with a humana medicare plan, hospital stays, doctor office visits and medicare deductibles are covered. and, of course, most humana medicare advantage plans include prescription drug coverage. in fact, in 2018, humana medicare advantage prescription drug plan members saved an estimated $7400, on average, on their prescription costs. most humana medicare advantage plans help you stay active and keep fit by including a silver sneakers fitness program at no extra
cost. and, you may be able to save on dental and vision expenses, because coverage is now included with most humana medicare advantage plans. you get all this coverage for as low as a zero dollar monthly plan premium in many areas. and your doctor and hospital may already be a part of humana's large network. if you want the facts, call right now for the free decision guide from humana. there is no obligation, so call the number on your screen right now to see if your doctor is in our network; to find out if you can save on your prescriptions and to get our free decision guide. licensed humana sales agents are standing by, so call now. ♪ i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications.
and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. >> melissa: be want to say thank you to alex conant for being on the couch today. we definitely needed your messaging today to kind of get through the messages that are being sent our way. it's a lot to sort through. ladies, thanks to you, as well.
>> marie: happy friday! >> melissa: we can all go and read the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of transcripts, which will be so fun over lunch! in the meantime we will hand it over to harris. >> harris: thanks, guys. have a great weekend. we come in with a fox news alert has those transcripts from the national security council director of european affairs, lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, and former russia advisor fee and i will 's coaster test man-hour we've been going back and forth with chad pergram and mike emanuel, our senior producer and senior correspondent, respectively, on capitol hill. we will get to them and hear with leanness is all this. chad, are you there? >> yes, i'm here. i've been going mostly to the alexander vindman testimony so far. this is very interesting because vindman is a key witness, because he was actually on the telephone call on july 25th. with president trump and the leader of